Drawings
Notice of Pre-AIA or AIA Status
The present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA .
Drawings
The drawings are objected to as failing to comply with 37 CFR 1.84(p)(5) because they include the following reference character(s) not mentioned in the description: 158 and 160 in Fig 1. Corrected drawing sheets in compliance with 37 CFR 1.121(d), or amendment to the specification to add the reference character(s) in the description in compliance with 37 CFR 1.121(b) are required in reply to the Office action to avoid abandonment of the application. Any amended replacement drawing sheet should include all of the figures appearing on the immediate prior version of the sheet, even if only one figure is being amended. Each drawing sheet submitted after the filing date of an application must be labeled in the top margin as either “Replacement Sheet” or “New Sheet” pursuant to 37 CFR 1.121(d). If the changes are not accepted by the examiner, the applicant will be notified and informed of any required corrective action in the next Office action. The objection to the drawings will not be held in abeyance.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
In the event the determination of the status of the application as subject to AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103 (or as subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103) is incorrect, any correction of the statutory basis (i.e., changing from AIA to pre-AIA ) for the rejection will not be considered a new ground of rejection if the prior art relied upon, and the rationale supporting the rejection, would be the same under either status.
The following is a quotation of the appropriate paragraphs of 35 U.S.C. 102 that form the basis for the rejections under this section made in this Office action:
A person shall be entitled to a patent unless –
(a)(1) the claimed invention was patented, described in a printed publication, or in public use, on sale, or otherwise available to the public before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
(a)(2) the claimed invention was described in a patent issued under section 151, or in an application for patent published or deemed published under section 122(b), in which the patent or application, as the case may be, names another inventor and was effectively filed before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
Claims 1 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Matus (US-20060076331-A1).
Regarding Claim 1, Matus teaches (Figs 1-8) a welding power supply circuit (30) for a MIG welding machine having a 115V inverter ([0004], [0007]), comprising a power conversion circuitry that is configured to convert input power to welding power (PFC (32)), and to output the welding power ([0033]). The control circuitry (controller (40)) is configured to: in response to detecting a short circuit (short circuit detector (66), voltage feedback signal (58), Vshort (68)) between a welding electrode and a workpiece, controlling the power conversion circuitry to increase a current of the welding power (“increasing output current at a first ramp rate so as to clear the prolonged short circuit” [0013]); and in response to identifying a predetermined condition (voltage feedback (58)) that would cause a circuit limited connected to the input power to trip, the controller (40) control the power conversion circuitry to reduce at least one of an input current of the input power or an output current of the welding power to avoid tripping the circuit limiter (limiter (74)) ([0013], [0035], [0040], Fig 5, 8).
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 103 which forms the basis for all obviousness rejections set forth in this Office action:
A patent for a claimed invention may not be obtained, notwithstanding that the claimed invention is not identically disclosed as set forth in section 102, if the differences between the claimed invention and the prior art are such that the claimed invention as a whole would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to a person having ordinary skill in the art to which the claimed invention pertains. Patentability shall not be negated by the manner in which the invention was made.
The factual inquiries for establishing a background for determining obviousness under 35 U.S.C. 103 are summarized as follows:
1. Determining the scope and contents of the prior art.
2. Ascertaining the differences between the prior art and the claims at issue.
3. Resolving the level of ordinary skill in the pertinent art.
4. Considering objective evidence present in the application indicating obviousness or nonobviousness.
Claims 2 and 3 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Matus in view of Geissleer (US-2010/006551-A1).
Regarding Claim 2, Matus all of claimed elements as previously mentioned, including the power supply circuit of a power source that converts incoming AC power signal into a DC bus voltage ([0033]-[0034]), but fails to teach a preregulator circuit configured to convert the input power, and a switched mode power supply configured to convert the power from the DC bus to output the welding power.
Geissler teaches (Figs 1-4) an enhanced power factor correction for welding and cutting power supplies. Geissler also teaches a preregulator (104, 204) that receives voltage input from the rectifier (102, 202) via the bus (114) and produces a DC output ([0008]). Additionally, Geissler teaches that welding-type systems often have inverter-baser power sources often referred to as switched-mode power supplies used to convert AC input power to useable DC welding power ([0004], [0005], [0008], [0026]).
Regarding Claim 3, Matus teaches all of the claimed elements as previously mentioned, but fails to specifically claims that the preregulator circuit limits the input current of the input power.
Geissler further teaches the welding-type power supply (20) can include different filters, feedback and control loops, and transformers or other converters designed to provide the desired output power characteristics, where intelligent control of the power supply is based on sensed welding parameters ([0041]). Additionally, Geissler teaches that the controller (210) can limit the input power drawn by the preregulator (204) via a strength algorithm ([0041]).
In this case, Matus teaches the welding power supply with power conversion circuitry that takes an AC input power and converts it to a DC bus voltage for the welding power, and Geissler teaches the preregulator circuit that converts the input power supplied to the switched more power supply into the welding power, along with providing a limit to the input current of the input power supplied to the DC bus. Matus and Geissler are analogous prior art to the instant application because both teach welding power supplies that convert an input power to useable welding power.
It would have been prima facie obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to include a preregulator and a switched mode power supply, along with limiting the input power supplied to the welding power supply, because all the claimed elements were known in the prior art, and one skilled in the art could have combined the elements as claimed by known methods with no change in their respective functions, and the combination yielded nothing more than predictable results to one of ordinary skill in the art.
Claims 5-7, and 10-11, 15, 17-20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Matus in view of Knoener (US-2021/0370430-A1).
Regarding Claim 5, Matus teaches all of the claimed elements as previously mentioned, but fails to specifically claim that the control circuity is configured to monitor and input voltage of the input power; and in response to the a loss of input voltage during a welding operation, store an indication of a breaker trip in a non-volatile storage device prior to loss of power to the control circuitry and the storage device; and in response to identifying the indication of the breaker trip in the storage device, outputting an alert indicating that a circuit breaker trip occurred at the input power.
Knoener teaches (Figs 1-4) a welding system (100) that is used to power, control, and provide the consumables for a welding application via a power supply (102) and/or wire feeder (104), where the input power from the power source is monitored and analyzed by the power supply ([0043]). Knoener further teaches the inclusion of non-volatile memory devices (124) and storage devices (123), where the electronic recording device (109) measures and receives data corresponding to the input and output characteristics of the welding power supply ([0039], [0049], [0084]). The non-volatile memory can store a variety of information and may be used for various purposes, and can be used to control various welding processes and parameters, as well as be configured to identify and provide specific outputs such as detecting short circuit parameters and capturing welding current data ([0050]). Knoener further provides for graphical interfaces (56, 58) that can display the representation of the input power characteristics, including diagnostics and peak values, and can also display alerts when predetermined thresholds or values have been exceeded (Fig 2, [0030]-[0031], [0043], [0062], and [0067]).
Regarding Claim 6, Matus teaches all of the claimed elements as previously mentioned, and further teaches that a “short phase” (110) is exited when a voltage feedback signal indicating the short circuit has been cleared (92) or a time exceeding a Tclear time has passed (Fig 6, Fig 8, [0044]-[0048], [0054]). Matus further teaches that for subsequent shorts, once the initial short has been cleared, the current is immediately lowered to the IClamp level (96), and then the current decreases naturally to level (98) at a rate slower than the rate of the first current decreasing after the first short clear (See Modified Fig 6) (Fig 6, Fig 8, [0044]-[0048], [0052], [0054]).
PNG
media_image1.png
541
509
media_image1.png
Greyscale
Regarding Claim 7, Matus teaches all of the claimed elements as previously mentioned, and further teaches a circuit breaker in the range of 15-20 amps ([0004], [0007], [0037]), but fails to specifically claim a user interface configured to receive an input identifying at least one of connected to the input power or an amperage associated with the circuit breaker connected to the input power.
Knoener teaches that the controller can receive user selections or inputs from a display and control panel, and an internally programmed algorithm causes the welding system (10) to operate according to the user selections ([0028]). The display can allow the user to understand how much margin they have before a circuit breaker might trip. ([0020]).
Regarding Claim 10, Matus teaches the circuit breaker is typically a 15- or 20-amp circuit breaker ([0004], [0007], [0037]).
Regarding Claim 11, Matus teaches the welding power supply that converts input power to welding power, where the power supply uses a circuit breaker to act as a circuit limiter. Knoener teaches that the controller that is capable of receiving user input, informing the user of power levels and settings, and allows the user to understand the operating margin prior to the circuit breaker tripping.
Regarding Claim 15, Matus further teaches a power source (12) connected to a wire feeder (20) via an input power cord or cable designed to translate power from the power source ([0027]). The wire feeder includes a wire drive assembly that is supplied to the weld under control of a controller, where the controller is governed by a microprocessor capable of being programmed to operate according to certain algorithms and/or programs according to user selections ([0028]). Matus further inspects the duration of the short circuit phase using the controller and short circuit timer (70) ([0040], [0053]). Knoener further teaches that the wire feeder of the welding system can vary the wire feed speed ([0014], [0038], [0043], [0044], [0056], [0062]).
Regarding Claim 16, Matus teaches that the welding power supply outputs a voltage for welding, where the controller monitors the short circuit timer, where a short circuit block (70) and limiter block (74) control the rate of change for the voltage during arc phase and short circuit phase by use of a logic signal (68) ([0040], [0062]).
Regarding Claim 17, Matus teaches the circuit breaker is typically a 15- or 20-amp circuit breaker ([0004], [0007], [0037]).
Regarding Claim 18, Matus further teaches (Fig 6-8) that the power supply device, upon detection of a short circuit, sets the current to a default ramp rate (124), monitors the short circuit condition (126), detects if a prolonged short circuit has occurred, then increases the current at a default ramp rate (134) before reading if the short has cleared (136). If the short has cleared, then the open arc condition (140) is maintained until another short circuit condition is created ([0053]). If the short has not cleared, then the controller determines if the output current exceeds the threshold (146), then checks if the time interval is exceeded (16) and increase the ramp rate another (150) time to clear the short (152) ((Fig 6-8)(See Modified Fig 6), [0052]-[0054], [0062]).
Regarding Claim 19, Matus further teaches (Fig 6-8) that the power supply device, upon detection of a short circuit, sets the current to a default ramp rate (124), monitors the short circuit condition (126), detects if a prolonged short circuit has occurred, then increases the current at a default ramp rate (134) before reading if the short has cleared (136). If the short has cleared, then the open arc condition (140) is maintained until another short circuit condition is created ([0053]). If the short has not cleared, then the controller determines if the output current exceeds the threshold (146), then checks if the time interval is exceeded (16) and increases the ramp rate another (150) time to clear the short (152) ((Fig 6-8)(See Modified Fig 6), [0052]-[0054], [0062]).
Regarding Claim 20, Matus further teaches (Fig 6-8) that the power supply device, upon detection of a short circuit, sets the current to a default ramp rate (124), monitors the short circuit condition (126), detects if a prolonged short circuit has occurred, then increases the current at a default ramp rate (134) before reading if the short has cleared (136). If the short has cleared, then the open arc condition (140) is maintained until another short circuit condition is created ([0053]). If the short has not cleared, then the controller determines if the output current exceeds the threshold (146), then checks if the time interval is exceeded (160) and increases the ramp rate another (150) time to clear the short (152) ((Fig 6-8)(See Modified Fig 6), [0052]-[0054], [0062]).
PNG
media_image1.png
541
509
media_image1.png
Greyscale
In this case, Matus teaches the welding power supply with power conversion circuitry that takes an AC input power and converts it to a DC bus voltage for the welding power, as well as detects when a short circuit has occurred, the multiple current ramp rates for subsequent short circuit trips, the circuit breaker of 15 or 20 amps, and the short circuit timer. Knoener teaches the user interface and controller for the welding power supply, where the controller can monitor the data input; including power, voltage, duration, average values, etc.; supplied to the power supply and uses non-volatile memory to store welding information such as short circuits as well as output alerts indicating a short has occurred. Matus and Knoener are analogous prior art to the instant application because both teach welding power supplies that convert an input power to useable welding power.
It would have been prima facie obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified Matus to incorporate the control circuitry and user interface teachings of Knoener to provide a welding power supply that has control circuitry configured to alter, change, and limit the inputs and outputs; including voltage, power, current, and durations; of the welding power supplied by the power supply upon detection of a short circuit. This configurability and information provided by the control circuitry allows the user to operate the system appropriately to ensure suitable welds are performed (Knoener [0082]).
Claims 4, 8, 9, 12, 13, and 14, are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Matus in view of Geissler and Knoener.
Regarding Claim 4, Matus teaches that the output welding current must be limited to not exceed the capacity of the circuit breaker, in which a controller (40) receives input and feedback regarding the output voltage and current, and then sets the output characteristics of the welding power source, and Geissler teaches the use of a switched mode power supply to control the supply of the welding power. Knoener teaches the control circuitry (112, 134) of the power supply employing a “foldback” technique, which limits the average output current to ensure current demand is not maintained in the extension range (92) as well as uses the foldback technique to reduce the current back into the operational range (90) of the power supply ([0073]).
Regarding Claim 8, Matus, Geissler, and Knoener teach all of the claimed elements as previously mentioned, where Geissler teaches intelligent control of the power supply, including limiting the input power drawn by the welding power supply, and Knoener further teaches that the welding power supply includes an input circuit that receives an input power from a power source, a graphical interface to represent the one or more input power characteristics of the input power, and the control circuitry ([0022]). Additionally, Knoener provides that the control circuitry is configured to generate graphical bands that represent a range of operational values according to upper and lower limits for one or more power input power characteristics bases on different thresholds ([0022]). Accordingly, the display can show the upper and lower limits for the range of operational values the welding power supply is capable of providing ([0022]). Knoener further teaches different ranges of operation values and thresholds for the power characteristics of the first and second input power ([0023]-[0024]).
Regarding Claim 9, Matus teaches the circuit breaker is typically a 15- or 20-amp circuit breaker ([0004], [0007], [0037]).
Regarding Claim 12, Matus teaches the welding power supply and control circuitry as previously mentioned, Geissler teaches the ability to limit the input current drawn by the welding power supply, and Knoener teaches the multiple operating limits and thresholds for the welding power supply.
Regarding Claim 13, Matus Geissler, and Knoener teach the welding power supply as previously mentioned, and Knoener further teaches that the control circuitry to measure input power characteristics over a predetermined period of time, and the display can indicate that the system is limiting the current output ([0027], [0032], [0073], [0074], [0076], [0092], [102]).
Regarding Claim 14, Regarding Claim 10, Matus teaches the circuit breaker is typically a 15- or 20-amp circuit breaker ([0004], [0007], [0037]).
In this case, Matus teaches the welding power supply with power conversion circuitry that takes an AC input power and converts it to a DC bus voltage for the welding power, as well as detects when a short circuit has occurred, the multiple current ramp rates for subsequent short circuit trips, the circuit breaker of 15 or 20 amps, and the short circuit timer. Geissler teaches the preregulator circuit that converts the input power supplied to the switched more power supply into the welding power, along with providing a limit to the input current of the input power supplied to the DC bus. Knoener teaches the user interface and controller for the welding power supply, where the controller can monitor the data input; including power, voltage, duration, average values, etc.; supplied to the power supply and uses non-volatile memory to store welding information such as short circuits as well as output alerts indicating a short has occurred. Matus, Geissler, and Knoener are analogous prior art to the instant application because all the references teach welding power supplies that convert an input power to useable welding power.
It would have prima facie obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified Matus to incorporate the teachings of Geissler and Knoener to provide a welding power supply detects when a short circuit has occurred and alerts the user as well as adjusts inputs and outputs of the power supply to ensure the short has been cleared during the welding process.
It would have been prima facie obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified Matus to incorporate the current limiting of Geissler and the control circuitry and user interface teachings of Knoener to provide a welding power supply that has control circuitry configured to alter, change, and limit the inputs and outputs; including voltage, power, current, and durations; of the welding power supplied by the power supply upon detection of a short circuit. This configurability and information provided by the control circuitry allows active control of multiple processes of the power supply, thus allowing the user to operate the system appropriately to ensure suitable welds are performed (Knoener [0082], Geissler [0026]).
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
Bowman (US-20190291201-A1) teaches welding power supplies having dynamic current responses, where power conversion circuitry is configured to convert supply power to welding current.
Lambert (WO-2012162619-A1) teaches a system and method for generating a weld, where a weld control algorithm selects the magnitude of voltages from a first and second control algorithm to ensure the voltage falls within an acceptable range of values output to the welding torch.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to HUNTER HEMMINGS whose telephone number is (571)467-0070. The examiner can normally be reached Monday - Friday 8:00-5:00.
Examiner interviews are available via telephone, in-person, and video conferencing using a USPTO supplied web-based collaboration tool. To schedule an interview, applicant is encouraged to use the USPTO Automated Interview Request (AIR) at http://www.uspto.gov/interviewpractice.
If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner’s supervisor, Ned Landrum can be reached at 571-272-5567. The fax phone number for the organization where this application or proceeding is assigned is 571-273-8300.
Information regarding the status of published or unpublished applications may be obtained from Patent Center. Unpublished application information in Patent Center is available to registered users. To file and manage patent submissions in Patent Center, visit: https://patentcenter.uspto.gov. Visit https://www.uspto.gov/patents/apply/patent-center for more information about Patent Center and https://www.uspto.gov/patents/docx for information about filing in DOCX format. For additional questions, contact the Electronic Business Center (EBC) at 866-217-9197 (toll-free). If you would like assistance from a USPTO Customer Service Representative, call 800-786-9199 (IN USA OR CANADA) or 571-272-1000.
/HUNTER G HEMMINGS/Examiner, Art Unit 3761
/EDWARD F LANDRUM/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 3761
Prosecution Insights